Re: [jclouds] Add keystone user add and delete methods. (#290)
@@ -123,4 +137,29 @@ @Fallback(EmptySetOnNotFoundOr404.class) ListenableFuture? extends Set? extends Role listRolesOfUserOnTenant(@PathParam(userId) String userId, @PathParam(tenantId) String tenantId); + + /** +* @see UserApi#add(String, String, Boolean, String) +*/ + @Named(user:add) + @POST + @SelectJson(user) + @Consumes(MediaType.APPLICATION_JSON) + @Path(/users) + @RequestFilters(AuthenticateRequest.class) + @Fallback(NullOnNotFoundOr404.class) Is the create request supposed to return a 404? All parameters seem to be related to the new user being created, so is this fallback actually needed? --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/290/files#r9700462
[jira] [Commented] (JCLOUDS-467) nameNodes only taking first name with AWS
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-467?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13900119#comment-13900119
]
Ignasi Barrera commented on JCLOUDS-467:
Maybe just taking the nodeNames iterator out of the loop? (don't know if it is
smooth enough as you are testing the hasNext() in every iteration):
{code}
if (generateInstanceNames !common.containsKey(Name)) {
IteratorString namesIt = nodeNames.iterator();
for (Map.EntryString, ? extends NodeMetadata entry :
instancesById.entrySet()) {
String id = entry.getKey();
String name = namesIt.hasNext()? namesIt.next() : id.replaceAll(.*-,
group + -);
...
}
}
{code}
nameNodes only taking first name with AWS
-
Key: JCLOUDS-467
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-467
Project: jclouds
Issue Type: Bug
Components: jclouds-compute
Reporter: Everett Toews
Assignee: Andrew Bayer
Fix For: 1.8.0
I'll put nameNodes into TemplateOptions but only the first gets used.
{code}
public class NameNodes {
public static final String MCW = multi-cloud-workshop;
public static final String LOAD_BALANCER = MCW + -lb;
public static final String DATABASE = MCW + -db;
public static final String WEB_SERVER_01 = MCW + -webserver-01;
public static final String WEB_SERVER_02 = MCW + -webserver-02;
private final ComputeService computeService;
public static void main(String[] args) {
NameNodes nameNodes = null;
try {
nameNodes = new NameNodes();
nameNodes.createServers();
} catch (Throwable e) {
e.printStackTrace();
} finally {
if (nameNodes != null) {
nameNodes.close();
}
}
}
public NameNodes() throws IOException {
IterableModule modules = ImmutableSet.Moduleof(
new SLF4JLoggingModule(),
new SshjSshClientModule());
Properties overrides = new Properties();
overrides.setProperty(POLL_INITIAL_PERIOD, 3);
overrides.setProperty(POLL_MAX_PERIOD, 3);
ComputeServiceContext context = ContextBuilder.newBuilder(aws-ec2)
.credentials(myAwsAccessKeyId, myAwsSecretAccessKey)
.modules(modules)
.overrides(overrides)
.buildView(ComputeServiceContext.class);
computeService = context.getComputeService();
}
private MapString, NodeMetadata createServers() throws
RunNodesException, IOException {
SetString nodeNames = ImmutableSet.of(DATABASE, WEB_SERVER_01,
WEB_SERVER_02, LOAD_BALANCER);
System.out.println(format(Creating servers %s, Joiner.on(,
).join(nodeNames)));
TemplateOptions options = computeService.templateOptions()
.nodeNames(nodeNames)
.inboundPorts(22);
Template template = computeService.templateBuilder()
.imageNameMatches(ubuntu/images/ubuntu-precise-12.04-amd64-server-20131003)
.locationId(us-west-2)
.hardwareId(m1.small)
.options(options)
.build();
Set? extends NodeMetadata nodes =
computeService.createNodesInGroup(MCW, 4, template);
MapString, NodeMetadata nameToNode = newHashMap();
System.out.println(Created servers:);
for (NodeMetadata node: nodes) {
String name = node.getName();
String publicIpAddress =
getOnlyElement(node.getPublicAddresses());
String user = node.getCredentials().getUser();
System.out.println(format( %-40s %s@%s, name, user,
publicIpAddress));
nameToNode.put(name, node);
}
return nameToNode;
}
private void close() {
computeService.getContext().close();
}
}
{code}
The output is
{code}
Creating servers multi-cloud-workshop-db, multi-cloud-workshop-webserver-01,
multi-cloud-workshop-webserver-02, multi-cloud-workshop-lb
Created servers:
multi-cloud-workshop-db ubuntu@54.184.78.205
multi-cloud-workshop-db ubuntu@54.203.107.107
multi-cloud-workshop-db ubuntu@54.202.100.94
multi-cloud-workshop-db ubuntu@54.184.52.175
{code}
Confirmed the names of the instances in the AWS console too.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1.5#6160)
Re: [jclouds] Add keystone user add and delete methods. (#290)
@@ -81,4 +81,21 @@ */ Set? extends Role listRolesOfUserOnTenant(String userId, String tenantId); + /** +* Create a new user in keystone. Creates (per Javadoc style guide - descriptive over imperative) --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/290/files#r9715276
Re: [jclouds] Add keystone user add and delete methods. (#290)
+ @Path(/users)
+ @RequestFilters(AuthenticateRequest.class)
+ @Fallback(NullOnNotFoundOr404.class)
+ ListenableFuture? extends User add(@PayloadParam(username) String
userName,
+@PayloadParam(email) String
userEmail,
+@PayloadParam(enabled) boolean
enabled,
+@PayloadParam(OS-KSADM:password)
String password);
+
+ /**
+* @see UserApi#delete(String)
+*/
+ @Named(user:delete)
+ @DELETE
+ @Path(/users/{userId})
+ @RequestFilters(AuthenticateRequest.class)
+ @Fallback(TrueOnNotFoundOr404.class)
Is this desirable behaviour? Are all user applications necessarily not going to
care whether the user we try to delete actually existed or not?
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/290/files#r9715343
Re: [jclouds] Add keystone user add and delete methods. (#290)
+
+ User newUser = userApi.add(randUser, email, true, password);
+
+ // validate that our new user exists
+ Set? extends User newUsers = userApi.list().concat().toSet();
+ assertTrue(newUsers.contains(newUser));
+
+ // validate that we can delete our user
+ assertTrue(userApi.delete(newUser.getId()));
+
+ // validate that the user no longer exists
+ Set? extends User finalUsers = userApi.list().concat().toSet();
+ assertEquals(initialUsers, finalUsers);
+ }
+
+ public void testDeleteInvalidUser() {
See comment above...is this silent failure what we think users will want in
all cases?
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/290/files#r9720539
Re: [jclouds] Add keystone user add and delete methods. (#290)
Fixed javadoc style comments. I'm not particularly tied to the fallback behavior on user deletion; I'm open to other options. Once we figure out what behavior we want, I'll update the javadoc so that it better describes the behavior. --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/290#issuecomment-35018490
Re: [jclouds] Add keystone user add and delete methods. (#290)
@@ -86,4 +88,37 @@ public void testUsersByName() {
}
}
+
+ public void testAddDeleteUser() {
I wrote this as one test because the test for the delete operation requires
that the add operation succeed, and that we know the ID of the user that was
created.
We should be able to figure out which operation failed by looking at which
assert failed.
---
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/290/files#r9724443
Re: [jclouds] Add keystone user add and delete methods. (#290)
[jclouds-pull-requests #601](https://jclouds.ci.cloudbees.com/job/jclouds-pull-requests/601/) SUCCESS This pull request looks good --- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/jclouds/jclouds/pull/290#issuecomment-35023554
[jira] [Created] (JCLOUDS-468) Nova needs to handle key pair creation better in the ComputeService
Everett Toews created JCLOUDS-468: - Summary: Nova needs to handle key pair creation better in the ComputeService Key: JCLOUDS-468 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-468 Project: jclouds Issue Type: Improvement Components: jclouds-compute Reporter: Everett Toews Priority: Minor Fix For: 1.8.0 Nova needs a strategy so it behaves more like org.jclouds.aws.ec2.compute.strategy.CreateKeyPairPlacementAndSecurityGroupsAsNeededAndReturnRunOptions.createNewKeyPairUnlessUserSpecifiedOtherwise() Right now it only has org.jclouds.openstack.nova.v2_0.compute.loaders.CreateUniqueKeyPair which does not examine TemplateOptions to determine what to do. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.1.5#6160)
[jira] [Commented] (JCLOUDS-468) Nova needs to handle key pair creation better in the ComputeService
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-468?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13901196#comment-13901196 ] Ignasi Barrera commented on JCLOUDS-468: The DigitalOcean provider also needs a better keypair creation strategy. It could be worth trying to extract the AWS logic, as the checks it performs seem to be generic, into a strategy in jclouds-compute so we can easily align all providers with the standard keypair creation flow. WDYT? Nova needs to handle key pair creation better in the ComputeService --- Key: JCLOUDS-468 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS-468 Project: jclouds Issue Type: Improvement Components: jclouds-compute Reporter: Everett Toews Priority: Minor Labels: openstack Fix For: 1.8.0 Nova needs a strategy so it behaves more like org.jclouds.aws.ec2.compute.strategy.CreateKeyPairPlacementAndSecurityGroupsAsNeededAndReturnRunOptions.createNewKeyPairUnlessUserSpecifiedOtherwise() Right now it only has org.jclouds.openstack.nova.v2_0.compute.loaders.CreateUniqueKeyPair which does not examine TemplateOptions to determine what to do. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.1.5#6160)
